Originally posted by phillyfan26 Deep, I think you overrated Hillary and underrate Obama. You keep saying "electoral votes" and "certain states" but rarely why Hillary would do a better job in those states than Obama.

Quote:

Originally posted by deep I believe Hillary still is the stronger in candidate in both Ohio and Florida.

And I believe there are current polls that support this.

These two states are most likely the key to the whole election

Something to keep in mind also.

The Latino or Hispanic vote, ( I don’t know which, if either is the preferred term) is a major consideration in this election. McCain has quite a bit of support there. Hillary has as much and probably more.

Obama is not strong there at all, the advantage could go to McCain. There are western states that could swing for McCain over Obama that Hillary might win.

the Florida vote?

the CA vote?

and all other states with Hispanic voting polulations- Hillary polls much higher than Obama

Quote:

Democrats have 141 delegates in Ohio to be allocated proportionally. A pre-Super Tuesday Columbus Dispatch poll had Clinton way out in front, winning 2 to 1 over Obama, and the state's mostly white working-class demographic suits her. Exit polls from Super Tuesday show Clinton leading Obama among voters earning less than $50,000 a year. But one of Clinton's key groups is largely missing from the state. "The wild card is we don't have the Latino population that California has," says Ohio University-Lancaster history professor Ken Heineman. Latino voters helped Clinton win California.

It really helps me understand why you'd prefer to see a Clinton nomination.

I'm still not absolutely certain that the Latino vote, for example, would swing McCain's way rather than Obama's. Again, I'm not sure that Democratic support is so candidate-specific that if their preferred candidate doesn't get the nom they'll stay home or vote for the Republicans. But then I suppose it wouldn't be about the Dems as much as it would the independents. And you're saying that these independents in states like FL or Ohio would swing towards Clinton but away from Obama. I'm doubtful of that, but, we'll see. . .

The goal is that we both be wrong. If Hillary gets the nomination, then she wins and I'm wrong. I could live with that. If Obama gets the nomination and he wins, then you're wrong and I know you could live with that too.

Originally posted by phillyfan26 Hasn't Obama been winning more battleground primaries than Hillary though?

Well, I know on Super Tuesday, Hillary won more of the states with lots of delegates (Massachusetts, New York, California). Wouldn't those states also have more electoral votes? My questions is whether a Clinton win in those states Democratic primaries translates into a Obama electoral college loss in the general election in those same states--or in Ohio or Florida. That's the part I'm not convinced of.

Well, I know on Super Tuesday, Hillary won more of the states with lots of delegates (Massachusetts, New York, California). Wouldn't those states also have more electoral votes? My questions is whether a Clinton win in those states Democratic primaries translates into a Obama electoral college loss in the general election in those same states--or in Ohio or Florida. That's the part I'm not convinced of.

Do you honestly believe that a Republican is going to win Massachusetts, New York or California in the general? Not a chance.

Ohio/Florida are a different story, but the big states Hillary are Democratic strongholds anyway.

This is completely the opposite of what reality is...Clinton would NOT be a harder candidate to beat for John McCain. If Clinton is the nominee the Democrats will quite probably lose the election...and deservedly so - if they choose Clinton over Obama they will hand the Whitehouse to McCain. Nobody wants BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH/CLINTON - that would be absolute disaster. It's time for the Democratic party to wake the fuck up and take a chance for real change...for once!!!

Do you honestly believe that a Republican is going to win Massachusetts, New York or California in the general? Not a chance.

Ohio/Florida are a different story, but the big states Hillary are Democratic strongholds anyway.

No, I do not believe the Republicans will win those states, regardless of whether Obama or Clinton is the Democratic nominee. My question is this--is Florida/Ohio a different story in terms of outcome? The argument--at least as I understand it--is that swing voters in Florida/Ohio would vote for McCain over Obama but choose Clinton over McCain. I tend to think they won't. If anything, swing voters are more likely to swing towards Obama than towards Clinton.

You'd really need to have more information about who exactly the "swing voters" in those particular states are; it's not like that's a nationally uniform category demographically. And also some sense of why they voted in the particular party primary they did (if they did, since most swing voters don't vote in primaries). In theory, primary exit polls might help with that, but since Florida's Democratic primary didn't officially "count" this time, turnout may have been exceptionally nonrepresentative and therefore those results might be less reliable than usual. According to the exit polls, Hillary did win with independents in Florida's Democratic primary, 40% to Obama's 30%; while McCain got 44% of the independent vote in Florida's Republican primary. (Total Democratic turnout was 1.7. million; total Republican turnout, 1.9 million; independents comprised 17% of ~1500 exit poll respondents in both cases.)

Originally posted by yolland You'd really need to have more information about who exactly the "swing voters" in those particular states are; it's not like that's a nationally uniform category demographically. And also some sense of why they voted in the particular party primary they did (if they did, since most swing voters don't vote in primaries). In theory, primary exit polls might help with that, but since Florida's Democratic primary didn't officially "count" this time, turnout may have been exceptionally nonrepresentative and therefore those results might be less reliable than usual. According to the exit polls, Hillary did win with independents in Florida's Democratic primary, 40% to Obama's 30%; while McCain got 44% of the independent vote in Florida's Republican primary. (Total Democratic turnout was 1.7. million; total Republican turnout, 1.9 million; independents comprised 17% of ~1500 exit poll respondents in both cases.)

Right, right. That's just what was I gonna say. I was just. . uh. . testing to see if you knew. . . Yeah, that's it.

It did not scream Gay to most of Florida's section of the Bible Belt. But it does seem to scream gay to people in this forum. Interesting.

these things don't "scream" gay to me. i know they are very common characteristics of gay men of a certain age. it's been written about all over Florida, and much more since he's been elected, and not before.

i'm sorry your boy Crist is gay and therefore unable to be on the ticket with McCain. he will receive scrutiny as a Veep pic that will go far beyond what he received as a candidate for governor, and with an entire nation of Republicans to choose from, i'm afraid he's not even going to make the short list, his popularity nonwithstanding.

it is too bad. and Karl Rove would quite disagree with you about the importance of getting gay bashing amendments on the ballot in 2004. he was quite right that something like this would mobilize the Republican base, and it certainly did in Ohio, and particularly in SE Ohio, which is quite conservative. 2004 was an election that was won by the base of the Republican party. they were able to mobilize their grassroots because they had superior organizational skills and because that amendment provided motivation for some evangelicals to get to the polls. and Ohio was the determining state. if Kerry had won Ohio, he would have won the election. Bush won the election because he won Ohio. and he won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendments.

it's quite simple.

there's a reason why David Dreier will only go so far in the Republican Party. it's the same reason that Crist will never be the Veep.

if Kerry had won Ohio, he would have won the election. Bush won the election because he won Ohio. and he won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendments.

it's quite simple.

there's a reason why David Dreier will only go so far in the Republican Party. it's the same reason that Crist will never be the Veep.

Well, exactly how many people voted in Ohio for Bush because of the gay bashing amendment that would not have voted for Bush anyway?

Unless you can answer that question, its simply a theory that Bush won Ohio because of the amendment.

While Florida is a battleground state, its probably the one of the 7 the Republicans have to worry the least about in this election. Unemployment there is below the national average at 4.7% and McCain will obviously do well with Florida's much older population. In addition, active duty military personal get to pick their "home state" and many pick Florida(expecially career military officers) which will bode well for McCain in the general election. Florida has only voted for the Democratic President 4 times since World War II, and in 1996, the last time the Democrats won the state, they likely only won it because Perot was a candidate who took away nearly 10% of the popular vote there.

So, perhaps having Crist on the ticket is not really needed in order to secure Florida. The real battles in November will likely be in places like Ohio, Missouri, and New Hampshire. The Republicans could actually lose Ohio but win the election if they pick up New Hampshire, which McCain has an excellent shot of doing.

Well, exactly how many people voted in Ohio for Bush because of the gay bashing amendment that would not have voted for Bush anyway?

Unless you can answer that question, its simply a theory that Bush won Ohio because of the amendment.

what exactly is your point here? are you actually only going to concede the point that gay bashing helps get the Republican base out to vote if every voter filled out a form that says "i hate gay people"? the leaps and wild inferences you make when it comes to Iraq, and yet you won't even countenance this?

i am not saying that Bush won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendment. i am saying that the Republican base won the election for Bush, especially in Ohio, and one thing that encourages the Republican base is bashing gays. this is why Rove sought to get these amendments on the ballot in 2004, and that's one of the reasons why Bush won states with such amendments. it helped overall base turnout, which gave him the election. it's the Rove strategy. all he wants is a 50%+1 election victory.

Quote:

So, perhaps having Crist on the ticket is not really needed in order to secure Florida. The real battles in November will likely be in places like Ohio, Missouri, and New Hampshire. The Republicans could actually lose Ohio but win the election if they pick up New Hampshire, which McCain has an excellent shot of doing.

i'm glad you've conceded the point. it's too bad for McCain, especially now that he might almost have to choose Huckabee.